Using participatory video to
develop youth leadership skills in
Colombia
GENERAL SECTION
14
by HARRIET MENTER, MARIA CECILIA ROA, OMAR FELIPE BECCERA, CLARA ROA and
WILSON CELEMIN
Introduction
This article describes how participatory video (PV) was used
as a tool to help young people focus on their leadership skills.
The young people were from a rural conflict zone in Colombia. Participants created a concrete product (a video to be
shown to peers), which was completed by the end of the
course. In a previous workshop, stand-alone activities were
used to focus on different leadership skills. This second workshop offered the young people an opportunity to consolidate
these skills by using them in a more realistic setting.
Facilitators of participatory processes often focus largely
on the impact of the process, such as the skills that are learnt
and the bonds of trust and communication (social capital)
that are created. But this experience highlights the fact that
the importance of the product for the participants themselves
must not be forgotten. It is the product that makes the exercise of these skills important. It motivates the participants to
apply these new skills to the highest possible level. This
insight helps us to improve the process impacts of participatory experiences.
Background
This work was carried out by the Communities and Watersheds Team at an agricultural research centre in Colombia.
“‘This experience highlights the fact that
the importance of the product for the
participants themselves must not be
forgotten. It is the product that makes
the exercise of these skills important. It
motivates the participants to apply these
new skills to the highest possible level.’”
The team was looking for rural partners to research ecosystems and their role in the long-term maintenance of environmental services. This led to us working with young people.
Young people are the future managers and beneficiaries of
natural resources in rural watersheds. We found that they
had a natural interest in understanding and preserving the
resources on which their livelihoods will depend in the
medium and long term.
The first participatory diagnosis of research needs that we
conducted with young people in rural areas resulted in a
diversity of topics. These included:
• forest management for firewood production;
• watershed storage capacity for water availability;
107
14Harriet Menter, Maria Cecilia Roa, Omar Felipe Beccera, Clara Roa and Wilson Celemin
Photo: CIAT
GENERAL SECTION
Participant
explaining how
to use a video
camera to one of
the facilitators
• water rights and distribution;
• food security practices for diet diversification; and
• forest characterisation and sustainable management for
income generation.
We decided to strengthen the research projects with
training in leadership skills. This would support the application of the findings and increase the impact of the young
people’s research. We started with the design and implementation of a series of leadership workshops. These were
aimed at giving rural young people the tools to gain selfconfidence, improve their communication skills, and work in
teams.
Following Van Linden and Fertman (1998), we adopted a
definition of youth leaders as individuals who:
• think for themselves;
108
• have the ability to use their personal strengths;
• can communicate their thoughts and feelings;
• can influence and motivate others for a common goal;
• work collectively to obtain results; and
• have high standards of achievement.
The idea was to develop a leadership skills programme
where each component of this definition is practiced and
assimilated by the young people with suitable exercises and
activities. It is hoped that these components will then be
applied and practiced in the research activities and in the
dissemination and application of their results.
Participatory video
Participants learn how to use video equipment, using participatory video processes, exercises and games. They then use
Using participatory video to develop youth leadership skills in Colombia
14
Course
participant
filming and
directing a
shot
Photo: CIAT
GENERAL SECTION
this knowledge to make a video. Participatory video has been
used in many different ways over the last 30 years: for community development, conflict resolution, sociological research, and
to allow disempowered groups to make their voices heard and
feed their views into policy-making processes. Shaw and
Robertson (1997) list the benefits of PV as:
• participation (i.e. getting people actively involved in
processes that affect them);
• individual development;
• communication;
• community development;
• critical awareness and consciousness raising;
• self advocacy and representation;
• capacity building and self reliance; and
• empowerment.
The underlying principle of participatory processes including PV is that it is participants themselves who are in control
of the process. The extent of this decision-making power –
and its balance with the decision-making power of the facilitator – will depend on the purpose of the process, the level
of confidence and ability of the participants in that field, and
the desired outcome. In some processes, the decision-making
power will rest largely with the facilitators. Participants will
only be consulted about key decisions. In others, the decision-making power may be shared between facilitators and
participants, or the participants may have complete control of
the process and refer to the facilitator for advice.
The different balances of decision-making power
between participants and facilitators have been described as
a ‘participation ladder’. Participants with no decision-making
109
14Harriet Menter, Maria Cecilia Roa, Omar Felipe Beccera, Clara Roa and Wilson Celemin
Photo: CIAT
GENERAL SECTION
Participants
planning the
timeline
power are shown at the bottom of the ladder. And participants who are completely in charge of the process are shown
at the top (Arnstein 1969, DeNegri et al 1999). Roger Hart
(1992) has adapted this idea. He has developed the Ladder
of Youth Participation. This refers to the balance of power
between young people and adults involved in a participatory
process.
The impact of young people taking control of the process
is considered as important as the impact of the final product
(whether this be a video, an agricultural research investigation
or a local development plan). Involvement in participatory
processes can have many impacts on participants’ social
capital, such as:
• increased self awareness;
• increased self confidence;
• changing of power structures within groups; and
• creation of trust and communication channels.
110
The process becomes more important when the aim of
the intervention is to create these process impacts. In this
case, the specific aim of the process was the development of
leadership skills. White suggests that when video is used to
develop personal skills, it is the process that is of utmost
importance. The video is ‘not intended to have a life beyond
the immediate context’ (White 2003).
Using participatory video to develop leadership skills
in Colombia
The participatory video process we used was the second
stage of the programme focusing on the development of
leadership skills for young people in rural areas. Forty young
people attended a residential workshop. They were split into
two groups. Those attending the leadership skills workshop
for the first time (32 participants) did the stage one workshop. Those who had participated in a previous stage one
Using participatory video to develop youth leadership skills in Colombia
The video process
The stage two participants took part in a two-day workshop.
This was designed as a series of different video-based activities. Each focused on a different leadership quality. Each activity was followed by a plenary session to discuss the lessons
that had been learnt through the activity. These included:
• technical points about using the camera, lighting, sound
etc.;
• process points about making videos such as how it feels to
be filmed and what can be done to put people at ease in
front of the camera; and
• discussions and lessons learnt about leadership qualities.
For example, the first activity was a video version of the
name game in which people presented themselves to the
camera. Then they discussed how we present ourselves, and
how we are perceived by others (communicating thoughts
and feelings).
The activities each served to focus on and develop a
different aspect of leadership, just as activities in the parallel
level one workshop had done. For example, interview activities in the video workshop allowed the young people to
focus on communication skills. Planning more complex
scenes, and planning the final film provided a focus for influencing others and resolving conflicts within a group. Filming
the sequences provided a space for examining working
collectively, taking on different roles within a group and
achieving high standards. After each activity, the group
discussed their experiences and what they had learnt about
the different leadership skills.
The video workshop differed from the level one workshop. Each activity was also designed as part of a sequence
through which the young people worked towards a final
outcome – the production of a video. This was to be shown
to their peers on the last day of the workshop. By contrast,
“Planning more complex scenes, and
planning the final film provided a focus
for influencing others and resolving
conflicts within a group. Filming the
sequences provided a space for
examining working collectively, taking
on different roles within a group and
achieving high standards.”
GENERAL SECTION
workshop (eight participants) took part in the stage two
video workshop.
The stage one workshop consisted of a series of standalone activities. Each was followed by a discussion. These
were designed to help young people practice and reflect
upon the different components of leadership. For example,
‘working collectively to obtain results’ was explored using a
series of activities. The group had to work together to overcome a physical challenge, such as crossing over an imaginary ‘acid swamp’ using ropes and planks of wood. In
another activity, participants created a flag that represented
them to present to the group, as a way of focusing on
‘communicating their thoughts and feelings’.
14
the level one workshop was a collection of stand-alone activities.
Using video as a way to develop leadership skills proved
to be more expensive than the activities in the stage one
workshop. This was due to the nature of the equipment
required. However, we judged it to be a worthwhile tool. The
young people had already demonstrated interest both in the
research projects (being involved in research projects for more
than two years) and in the development of leadership skills
(had participated in the previous workshop). The benefit was
twofold. The primary aim of this workshop was to develop
leadership skills. But we hope that at a later stage, the young
people will use their newly developed technical abilities
alongside their leadership skills in their communities – as a
way of facilitating discussions on the use of natural resources,
and facilitating community planning and action. In the long
run, this also allows the young researchers to reach bigger
audiences of rural young people. At this initial stage,
however, the video was being used by the participants themselves, and not as a tool to use within the wider community.
Like any other participatory tool, with PV the product
impact is important (the impact the video has). But so is the
process impact (the impact the process has on the participants). In this process, the space for the participants to make
decisions themselves was limited, as both the medium (video)
and the subject (leadership) had been chosen by the facilitators. But within these parameters, the facilitators tried to
leave as much space as possible for the participants to make
their own decisions. They were given space to decide what
to film, how to film it, and what to put into the final video.
Group decisions were taken using a range of participatory
tools such as ranking, group brainstorming, spider diagrams
and group discussions.1
1 See, for example, A Trainer’s Guide for Participatory Learning and Action (Pretty
et al., 1995).
111
14Harriet Menter, Maria Cecilia Roa, Omar Felipe Beccera, Clara Roa and Wilson Celemin
GENERAL SECTION
Participants
receiving
certificates at
the end of the
course.
The young people learnt the basics of using the video
equipment very quickly. The games at the start of the workshop focused on allowing the participants to learn through
doing, and learn through making mistakes. The facilitators
took a decision to intervene as little as possible when the
participants were planning and filming their work. This was
to allow them as much autonomy as possible in deciding
what to film and how to film it. In practice, this sometimes
meant compromising the quality of the final product (for
example, allowing a participant to film a shot in a badly lit
area, despite facilitators being aware that the lighting was
poor). The facilitators agreed that the process and the participants’ autonomy were more important than the quality of
the final product. So it was necessary to compromise on the
quality of the final product.
112
Results
The participants and the facilitators considered both the level
one and level two workshops a success. Comments from
participants of both workshops suggested that they
perceived the video workshop to be ‘the real thing’ in terms
of the young people exercising their leadership skills.
The difference that they perceived between the two
workshops was that in the video process, there was an ultimate goal that had to be delivered. This meant that the
young people were not just ‘practicing’ their skills but were
using them in a real situation in which they had to deliver.
Failing to deliver had a ‘real’ consequence. Compare the
imaginary ‘acid swamp’ they would fall into if the groups had
failed, with the failure to have a product ready at the end of
the programme, or showing a badly made video to their
peers and friends.
Using participatory video to develop youth leadership skills in Colombia
The final film that the group showed was an exploration of the six
different components of leadership they had explored. The group chose
footage that exemplified each of these aspects. In some cases they
used footage that had been filmed during the activities, for example
interviewing each other on their leadership activities within their
communities, or explaining their body maps to the camera. They also
filmed new scenes to fill in gaps. For example, they filmed themselves
building a human pyramid as an example of collective working. They
developed a short drama about peer pressure to demonstrate the
concept of people thinking for themselves. They also filmed each other
directing shots as an example of influencing and motivating others for
a common goal. The quality of the film was generally very high,
although there were sections where sound quality or lighting could
have been improved.
Decisions were taken as a group. They worked on a collective time-line
and decided what to include or leave out through group discussion
and group ranking. The exception to this was that footage of people
could not be used without their explicit consent, resulting in some
individuals vetoing certain clips.
The group ‘topped and tailed’ their film with a scripted introduction
about what they had done, and their conclusions on the whole process
and how they would use their skills. They gave their decisions to the
facilitators who then took charge of the digital editing process. A
rough version of the final product was shown to the group for any last
changes, before being shown to peers. The end result was a very
watchable, humorous and insightful film about leadership from these
young people’s point of view.
This division may seem contrived. Ultimately, both activities were run within the safe confines of a workshop. The
worst consequence of failure in either activity is feeling
embarrassed or inadequate. However, the difference proved
to be very important for the young people themselves. This
may be because making a video and using the equipment
involved is perceived as a more serious activity than the
games and arts-based activities that were used in the level
one workshop.
Some of the level one workshop activities also had tangible product outputs, such as each person making a flag.
However, each was a stand-alone activity. If a young person
was uninterested, they could sit out that activity while still
being included in the workshop as a whole. In the video
process, participants have to remain involved throughout.
They had to continue using their leadership skills even when
the situation was challenging, as they had a product to deliver.
Working collaboratively in a group of people with different
ideas becomes more challenging when there is a deadline to
meet and a product to deliver. The participants were putting
into practice leadership skills in a more authentic situation.
“Working collaboratively in a group of
people with different ideas becomes
more challenging when there is a
deadline to meet and a product to
deliver. The participants were putting
into practice leadership skills in a more
authentic situation”
GENERAL SECTION
Box 1: The final product
14
This proved to be a good test of leadership abilities.
In the participants’ evaluation of the video workshop the
activity they considered most effective was showing the video
to the group. This suggests an important lesson about the
way skills are taught through participatory processes. The
practitioner may focus on the process. But creating a product
is where the skills are practiced. Whether the product is ‘real’
or ‘contrived’, it provides a focus for participants, giving the
sensation of achievement through practising these skills – as
opposed to the skills being an end in themselves.
Our participants felt the facilitators should have intervened
more to ensure the technical quality of the film was higher,
and avoid some of the basic mistakes. This highlights the
difference between the views of the facilitators and the young
people regarding the relative importance of the process and
the end product. For the facilitators, the process was more
important, and technical glitches seen as less important than
the participants’ autonomy to make mistakes. But the participants placed more importance on the end product. In an
ideal world, there would be time to train participants so that
they could both work autonomously and avoid mistakes.
However, often due to lack of time, decisions have to be taken
about what to prioritise. Sometimes the priorities of the participants differ from those of the facilitators.
Conclusions
We think useful lessons can be learnt from this experience.
Understanding the importance of the product for participants
helps us as practitioners to improve the impact of the
process. Making the end product as real and meaningful as
possible, and giving it a high level of importance gives people
more motivation to exercise the skills they are learning, and
often pushes them to exercise those skills in a pressure situation. For example, a video ‘premiere’ can be organised, and
invitations sent to relevant people outside of the process. This
suggests that even when video is used to develop personal
113
GENERAL SECTION
14Harriet Menter, Maria Cecilia Roa, Omar Felipe Beccera, Clara Roa and Wilson Celemin
skills the product is as important as the process, even if it
does not have a life beyond the immediate context as White
(2003) suggests.
Ensuring the end product has meaning for participants is
also important. In this case, making the film had real
meaning and relevance for the young people. It was a
medium that engaged and enthused them instantly. It was
something they were very familiar with through television.
Yet having the power to control it was a new experience. The
young people felt that expressing themselves on video gave
their opinions and experiences gravitas, and made them
more powerful, and more likely to be heard. This teaches us
the importance of ensuring that participatory processes are
working towards an end product that motivates its particiCONTACT DETAILS
Harriet Menter
39 Sidney Grove
Newcastle
NE4 5PD
UK
Tel: 07738 016450
Email: [email protected]
Maria Cecilia Roa, Omar Felipe Beccera, Clara
Roa and Wilson Celemin
Communities and Watersheds Team
Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical
(CIAT)
A.A. 6713
Cali
Colombia
114
pants. In ideal circumstances, the participants themselves
would choose the end product. However, in this case video
proved to be a powerful tool for working with young people.
We realised that the product is important. These young
people not only learnt, but also practiced their new skills
within the process (the process impact). This has led us to
reassess our assumption that the process is more important
than the product. Without focusing on the product, facilitators may in fact diminish the participants’ motivation to exercise their leadership skills. This can be true for other
participatory process, especially those that focus on process
impacts. It requires the facilitator to consider carefully the
relative importance that is attributed to process impacts and
product impacts.
REFERENCES
Arnstein, S. R. (1969) ‘A Ladder of Citizenship
Participation.’ In Journal of the American
Planning Association Vol 35: 4, pp 216–224
De Negri, B, E. Thomas, A. Ilinigumugabo, I.
Muvandi and G. Lewis (1999) Empowering
Communities. Washington: The Academy for
Educational Development
Hart, R. (1992) Children’s Participation from
Tokenism to Citizenship. Florence: UNICEF
Innocenti Research Centre
Pretty, J., (1995) A Trainer’s Guide for
Participatory Learning and Action. London:
IIED
Shaw, J. and C. Robertson (1997) Participatory
video: a practical approach to using video
creatively in group development work.
London: Routledge
Van Linden, J., and C.I. Fertman (1998) Youth
leadership: A guide to understanding
leadership development in adolescents. San
Francisco, Calif: Jossey-Bass.
White, S. (2003) ‘Participatory video: a process
that transforms the self and the other.’ in
White, S. (ed) Participatory Video: Images that
Transform and Empower New Delhi: Sage
Publications